MEXICO Trends and Developments Contributed by: Jonathan Adams and Claudia Aguilar, Baker McKenzie
White-Collar Crime in Mexico: Legal Reforms, Enforcement Trends and Institutional Shifts (2024– 2025) White-collar crime in Mexico has undergone sig - nificant transformation over the past year, driven by institutional reforms, regulatory updates, and high- profile cases that have reshaped the legal and corpo - rate landscape. As the country intensifies its efforts to combat financial crime and corruption, both the public and private sectors face increasing pressure to strengthen compliance, transparency and account - ability. This article explores the key trends, legal devel - opments and enforcement challenges that define Mexico’s current approach to white-collar crime. Brief overview of white-collar crime in Mexico In Mexico, white-collar crime has gained greater rele - vance since the implementation of the corporate crim - inal liability regime in 2014, as part of a constitutional reform that transformed the criminal justice system into an accusatory model. This regime represented a significant shift from the traditional view that only individuals could be held criminally responsible. Under this regime, companies can be prosecuted for crimes committed in their name, for their benefit, or using their resources, regardless of whether the individuals involved are also prosecuted. To hold a company criminally liable under Mexico’s corporate criminal liability regime, prosecutors must establish that the crime was enabled or facilitated by the absence of adequate internal controls, oversight or compliance mechanisms within the organisation. As a result, there has been growing scrutiny of cor - porate compliance programmes, risk management frameworks, and ethical standards. Companies are now expected to implement and maintain effective policies that detect and prevent criminal behaviour, such as anti-corruption protocols, robust and effective internal controls, whistle-blower systems, and regu - lar audits. Failure to do so exposes them not only to reputational damage, but also to potential criminal prosecution, fines and operational restrictions. Recent trends in criminal enforcement and prosecution Over the past year, Mexican federal authorities have intensified their efforts to combat white-collar
crime, focusing primarily on crimes related to tax fraud, smuggling, money laundering, and fuel theft (commonly known as huachicol ). These efforts are in response to specific dynamics described below. While other socially significant crimes, such as corrup - tion, are also part of the federal government’s criminal policy, there is currently no official data available to show their evolution or confirm an increase in their enforcement. Tax crimes Over the past year, Mexico has experienced a signifi - cant tightening of criminal tax policy, driven by con - stitutional reforms, judicial criteria, and new powers granted to the Mexican tax authority. This change has created a more aggressive environment for the pros - ecution of tax crimes, especially in the following areas. On 31 December 2024, an amendment to Article 19 of the Mexican Constitution was enacted, expanding the list of crimes subject to mandatory pretrial deten - tion. The reform now includes crimes such as smug - gling and activities involving the use of fraudulent tax receipts ( Comprobante Fiscal Digital por Internet or CFDIs). In parallel, the Mexican Tax Administration Service ( Servicio de Administración Tributaria or SAT) and the Attorney General’s Office have intensified enforce - ment efforts, particularly in foreign trade operations. These include increased inspections and audits aimed at combating smuggling, tax fraud, and the issuance of false tax receipts. These actions are part of the SAT’s 2025 Master Plan, which also incorporates arti - ficial intelligence tools to detect patterns of tax eva - sion and improve risk-based oversight. The Mexican tax authorities have increasingly relied on Article 69-B of the Federal Fiscal Code to address simulated transactions and tax fraud. This provision allows the SAT to presume that a taxpayer’s opera - tions are non-existent if they lack the infrastructure, personnel or assets to support the issuance of digital tax receipts. Entities identified as issuing or using false invoices – known as Empresas que Facturan Opera- ciones Simuladas (EFOS) and Empresas que Dedu- cen Operaciones Simuladas (EDOS) – face serious consequences, including the cancellation of digital
197 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook